About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
to settle on passing background legislation and calling that a win. on abc over the weekend, harry reid pointedly would not commit to supporting an assault weapons ban. >> i didn't vote for the assault weapons last time because it didn't make sense but i'll take a look at it. i think everyone acknowledges we should do some background checks. >> reid said the senate would move the bill through the judiciary committee, it's unlikely to include a gun ban. though reid has said california senator dianne feinstein will have an opportunity to present the provision as an amendment once the bill reaches the senate floor. remember there's a whole bunch of red tape democrats want to actively cascade a vote against the assault weapons ban so they can show they are pro-gun. >> the super bowl ad new york city mayor's group ran in the d.c. market focused on one part of the gun control bills and that's the background check, one pointing out the nra at one time supported closing the gun show loophole. >> we think it's reasonable to provide mandatory, instant criminal background checks for every sale at
are in the majority, it's a little bit of a greater responsibility. harry reid has to make the decision whether or not to bring these bills to the floor. there are marginal members in his caucus that might not want to take these issues up. he is responsible for them in some sense. i do believe the mayor is very much involved in this issue. we've been spending a lot of time lobbying members of congress, members of the senate on both republicans and democrats. i do believe that the senate is going to take these issues up. i do believe harry reid is going to bring comprehensive gun bill to the floor. maybe in different pieces. it may be one package. that will be his decision. i do believe something is going to pass in a bipartisan way out of the senate. you saw politico reporting there was a bipartisan group, republicans and democrats from rural and urban states who are working on a comprehensive package on a background checks. i thinkure going to see something get through the senate, and then i think you will have house republicans -- not the majority of them. some number. 20, 30, 40. who will be
slammed harry reid for saying he hadn't read dianne feinstein's bill banning assault weapons. >> how can harry reid, a fellow democrat, and i'm willing to criticize him, say he hasn't read the bill. this is an emergency. let's knock off the washington baloney and support the president and get some things done. >> the white house wants to overload washington's political circuits. an effort to see what it can get through congress without letting congress and particularly congressional republicans, define what issues get addressed. republican leaders are making it clear they prefer to talk about just one thing before the march budget shutdown. >> this was supposed to be the day that the president submitted his budget to the congress. but it's not coming. i think that's too bad. our economy could use some presidential leadership right now. >> and top senate republican mitch mcconnell was just as eager to talk budget hitting the floor to slam democrats for floating new revenue proposals. >> this is just another opportunity to trot out the democrat focus group approved policy stunt. if this is
did because harry reid spent $2 million attacking him as a conservative during the republican primary. he said he never voted for a tax increase and always pro-life and supported a balanced budget amendment, and the object was help nominate the weakest republican candidate possible, so they'd have a chance -- >> but you set yourself up as a politbureau and the theory on republicanism is to lit the local state -- >> rand paul had a right and everybody has a chance in markets and let people go in and participate, the opposite of politbureau and the more who participate the better off we are and the more we examine the quality of the candidates the more likely we have fewer christine o'donnell's and more ra rand paul joos what do you think of the republican party's decision, temporarily, to block the nomination of the defense secretary for the first time in our history. >> why wouldn't they? in the end he's probably going to be confirmed, but in the meantime this is an opportunity -- the president thought in nominating chuck hagel he'd put him out there and rub republicans' noses in it a
in this process. you've got republican senators miffed at harry reid for not honoring the whole -- you have him having ripped on republicans. there are so many issues at play here. looks like he's going to get confirmed. and it's also an opportunity for republicans to ask some tough questions on benghazi, all of which haven't been answered yet. >> i want to go to something you said when we were together last time, which is you were concerned about his performance -- >> absolutely. >> and you can't help by wonder what bill cohen wonders, which is is he going to be a weak secretary? >> he didn't have a strong hearing then, but all the reasons listed for chuck hagel, none has to do with any pending issues before the pentagon. it has to do with he's been mean to president bush. he's been mean to john mccain. this process has said more about republicans than quite franklin it has said about chuck -- >> what about this issue of him -- is he going to be in charge of the pentagon? >> i think that is going to be the test for chuck hagel when he is sworn in fairly quickly and fairly soon as the next defe
leader harry reid saying he's not going to let that happen. again, the white house at this hour, martin, still confident that hagel will be confirmed. >> and this in the context of what happened last night. what are your sources telling you about the likelihood of the president referencing north korea and its nuclear weapons test in his speech tonight? >> reporter: well, martin, my sources are telling me it is very likely that he is going to reference what happened in north korea overnight. remember, the white house put out a statement overnight condemning the action saying that it was a highly provocative action. i can also tell you that president obama spoke to the president of south korea today. they shared their concerns about this third nuclear launch, what is perceived to be really the most aggressive nuclear test that north korea has conducted to date. the u.n. security council con seming it, including north korea's closest ally in the region, china, condemning the action overnight. i think you can expect to hear president obama address this threat. my source is telling me he wil
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)